Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts

Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts

Peter Scarborough1,2, Michael Clark3, Linda Cobiac4, Keren Papier5, Anika Knuppel6, John Lynch7, Richard Harrington1,2, Tim Key5, and Marco Springmann3

1) Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Oxford, UK

2) NIHR Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre at Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK

3) Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

4) Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia

5) Cancer Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

6) Independent researcher

7) Nature-based Solutions Initiative, Department of Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

vegan 3568298

When scientists model dietary scenarios, they often fail to reflect true dietary practices, and do not account for variation in the environmental burden of foods consumed due to sourcing and production methods. In this paper, the authors link dietary data from a sample of 55,504 vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters with food-level data on greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, eutrophication risk and potential biodiversity loss from a review of 570 life-cycle assessments, covering more than 38,000 farms in 119 countries. The results show that the dietary impacts of vegans were 25.1% (95% uncertainty interval, 15.1–37.0%) that of high meat-eaters (≥100 g total meat consumed per day) for greenhouse gas emissions, 25.1% (7.1–44.5%) for land use, 46.4% (21.0–81.0%) for water use, 27.0% (19.4–40.4%) for eutrophication and 34.3% (12.0–65.3%) for biodiversity. The findings show clear links between meat consumption and environmental impact, and provide further evidence for reducing meat consumption.

 

Paper abstract:

Modelled dietary scenarios often fail to reflect true dietary practice and do not account for variation in the environmental burden of food due to sourcing and production methods. Here we link dietary data from a sample of 55,504 vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters with food-level data on greenhouse gas emissions, land use, water use, eutrophication risk and potential biodiversity loss from a review of 570 life-cycle assessments covering more than 38,000 farms in 119 countries. Our results include the variation in food production and sourcing that is observed in the review of life-cycle assessments. All environmental indicators showed a positive association with amounts of animal-based food consumed. Dietary impacts of vegans were 25.1% (95% uncertainty interval, 15.1–37.0%) of high meat-eaters (≥100 g total meat consumed per day) for greenhouse gas emissions, 25.1% (7.1–44.5%) for land use, 46.4% (21.0–81.0%) for water use, 27.0% (19.4–40.4%) for eutrophication and 34.3% (12.0–65.3%) for biodiversity. At least 30% differences were found between low and high meat-eaters for most indicators. Despite substantial variation due to where and how food is produced, the relationship between environmental impact and animal-based food consumption is clear and should prompt the reduction of the latter.

 

Publication details

Scarborough, P., Clark, M., Cobiac, L. et al. Vegans, vegetarians, fish-eaters and meat-eaters in the UK show discrepant environmental impacts. Nat Food 4, 565–574 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00795-w